🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the regulator applied to the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the regulator to instruct platforms to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been deemed "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that generated extensive public discourse". X drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with different editing could have met that threshold. As a result, the board revised the rating of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the panel held a contrary view, contending the video was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was released years after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Decision

In a statement on its global government affairs account, the platform welcomed the decision.

"X fought this case to defend free speech and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. We remain committed to protecting these fundamental values."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.